The petitioner challenged a draft development plan. The court held the petition premature as the Government had not yet sanctioned the plan or invited objections under Section 31 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966. The PIL was disposed without interference.
Petition dismissed; Public Interest Litigation disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(1)
907-PIL-24-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
907 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.24 OF 2021
SATISH NAGNATH SHINDE ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS..RESPONDENTS
Mr. Nikhiles K. Tungar, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mr. S. G. Karlekar, AGP for Respondents-State.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATED : 24th FEBRUARY, 2021.
PER COURT:-
1.We have heard Mr. Tungar, learned counsel
for the petitioner and the learned A.G.P.
2.We find that the petition is premature.
The draft development plan has been forwarded by
the Government for sanction. The Government has to
resort to the procedure contemplated under Section
31 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act,
1966. The said steps have yet to see light of the
day. The Government has not sanctioned the draft
development plan submitted by the Municipal
Council. The Proviso (ii) of the sub-Section 1 of
Section 31 contemplates the procedure to be
followed by the Government before sanctioning the
substantial changes.
(2) 907-PIL-24-2021
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner
accepts that the Government has not yet published
any Notification calling for the objections. The
Government has not sanctioned the said plan.
4.In light of the above, no interference is
called for. Public Interest Litigation is disposed
of. No costs.
Devendra/February-2021
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging a draft development plan is maintainable when the plan has not yet been sanctioned or published for objections.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satish Nag Nath Shinde
The State of Maharashtra
S. V. Gangapurwala
Shrikant D. Kulkarni
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court